Posted on 10/28/2014 11:11:18 AM PDT by Kaslin
An elderly veteran and his wife say theres absolutely no way the flagpole outside their Indiana home is coming down, despite threats from a homeowners association and a local prosecutor intends to back them in court if necessary.
Bob and Judy Willits insist they intend to fight multiple letters from the Fieldstone Homeowners Association regarding the American and POW/MIA flags outside their Greenfield home. The couple was first told in early September that the freestanding patriotic display wasnt welcome since it wasnt mounted to the home.
We have absolutely no plans to take it down, Judy Willits told FoxNews.com on Tuesday. It would be kind of a bloody situation if we had to take the flag down at this point.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Ah I see, you think America has Kings, Queens and other assorted royalty that hold the title to land in perpetuity. Try reading your link.
What is the “substantial interest” that an HOA has in mowing around flower beds surrounding a flag pole versus mowing all the other flower beds in the HOA?
Hint: There is no substantial interest and they will lose in court with damages awrded to the Korean War Vet.
Yeah it is. The more the better
It is unconstitutional to ban burning a flag, which is considered a form of political expression. So, by the same logic shouldn't displaying the flag be protected expression?
For someone who purports to be a supporter of property rights, you sure seem more than willing to strip this man of his.
Thanks.
That’s a good letter.
Duh, I posted the case law.
If you think you can change your title unilaterally go ahead. I certainly won’t stand in your way. I am always open to smart people like you who re-interpret my meaning and claim special powers.
Del Boca Vista Phase III?
PS - The homeowner, in this case, is also the landowner, in that this particular development is not condominium-style.
So, the man owns the house and the lot it sits on.
Your continued support of the HOA will demonstrate your LACK of commitment to private property rights.
If it is against the Constitution to burn a flag, isnt it unconstitutional to ban its display?
*******************
A few clarifications. It’s not unconstitutional to ban others from displaying flags on property that you own. With this in mind, HOA’s should not be confused with condominiums, where the condo association owns common property that may include the area where the unit owner wants to put his flag. Moreover, even with HOA’s having no commonly owned property, the unit owners have to agree, before they move in, to the restrictions that may be imposed by the HOA. This is NOT communism.
I’ll remember you said that.
Duh is right on the money. Case law requires a case or cases. What you posted was a synopsis laced with opinion and what's more you didn't even read it or you would know that the HOA will lose in court because they have no "substntial interest" inbanning a well kept flagpole within a flower bed becasue they say it is a burden to mow around flower beds yet they mow around all sorts of flower beds in the development. Some flower beds are more equal than others morph?
You’re oh for two making up my positions. Never said the HOA would win anything in court. If you don’t understand something about my positions read my posts and I will explain anything you don’t understand.
You’re spinning from the king and queen comment which was clearly wrong about title and legal rights. Now you’re saying I said the HOA would win in court on the flag issue. A strange statement when I posted information showing just the opposite.
Why not argue with yourself since you’;re already making up both positions?
If you’re just looking to spar, find someone who wants to play.
:-} Back to reality. You said “The person who originally built the properties has that right to make that determination”. I called bs. You cited natural law from 17th century England to back your claim. I laughed out loud and made light of that. The person who originally built the property has no say in whether or not a future homeowner votes yea or nay to an HOA. None, nada, zippo.
Never said they can’t change by vote. In fact I said that.
The reference to english law was a response to someone else who posted something different.
You’re wrong about my posts again and it’s strike three.
Have fun.
I’m having fun. Sorry you’re not but I understand. Libertarianism can be very confusing at all stages of the morph.
You are incorrect. The titles to the property are handled down to the subsequent owners. In an HOA community you cannot change anything unilaterally.
The CC@Rs can be changed by vote and must be posted with the state.
Title changes are more difficult.
79 for you also.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.